A FORGER and his accomplice were producing sackfuls of fake £20 notes in the bedroom of a rented west end flat.

Tony Howland, 35, was making the counterfeit money using ink jet printers and putting a water mark and thread on them similar to those on genuine notes.

Over two months he and co-accused Victor Robertson were responsible for producing £160,000 worth of fake £20 notes.

When police raided the flat at Queens Crescent, Glasgow, they found notes, which were produced 12 to a sheet of paper, in various stages of production.

Police also found a printed note estimating it would take four days to print, glue, dry and cut £56,000 worth of the fake £20s.

Howland, an out-of-work printer and graphic designer, admitted counterfeiting notes and having the equipment and materials necessary to produce the fakes.

Robertson, 41, of Mavisbank Gardens, Glasgow, was convicted of being involved in the counterfeit operation by making and passing notes between July 18 and September 16, 2013.

Co-accused Stuart Trimble, of Tullis Street, Glasgow, had the counterfeiting charge against him found not proven.

The High Court in Glasgow heard that Howland, who came to Glasgow from London, was churning out tens of thousands of pounds worth of Royal Bank of Scotland forgeries using three ink jet printers, a laminator, Bible paper and special glue.

The enterprise was run from the flat he was renting. In a room he called his office police found the printers and £55,080 of fake notes - many of them lying on the floor drying.

Around £160,000 in notes was produced, although £20,000 was of such poor quality it was destroyed. Police estimate that around £73,000 of the fake notes were taken from the flat and distributed.

In mid September an order was received for £50,000 in counterfeit notes and a deadline given as 2pm on September 15, 2013.

Advocate depute Bill MacVicar, prosecuting, said: “Mr Howland was unable to complete the order and left the flat and fled to London where he contacted the police.”

Howland claimed he thought he was coming to Scotland to manufacture novelty scratch cards, but instead was forced under duress to make counterfeit money.

But Mr MacVicar said: “The Crown does not accept that he was forced into becoming involved in the making of the money from the start.”

The court heard that Howland blew the whistle on the operation after he was given an extremely tight deadline to produce £50,000 in fake notes.

Mr MacVicar said: “It is clear a number of threats of violence were made to Mr Howland by text message from his co-accused. These were made on September 15 and 16, 2013. Many of the threats were received during the time Mr Howland was at Brixton police office. These appear to flow from the failure by Mr Howland to produce the notes which had been ordered from him.”

When police raided co-accused Robertson’s flat they found 64 fake £20 notes which had been flushed down the toilet. They also found six fake notes in a bedroom and 30 counterfeit notes in another bedroom.

Robertson denied having anything to do with a counterfeit operation.

He claimed that he knew Howland through a scratch card business he was involved in, which he claimed was very successful.

Robertson said he was in regular contact with Howland because he was trying to get him to design and print more novelty scratch cards for him.

When asked in court if he was a member of a counterfeit gang Robertson replied: “No. It’s absolute nonsense.”

The court heard that he sent Howland a number of texts after he fled to London including one that read: “You’ll get us all jail and you’ll regret it.”

Mr MacVicar said: “It is not possible to say how many of these notes produced by Howland entered circulation. They were formed from a single template note. It is known that 2422 notes have been recovered since June 2013. One thousand nine hundred and sixty-five were uncovered by bank security examinations of notes. The rest were not accepted and reported to the police.”

Judge Norman Ritchie QC remanded both men in custody and deferred sentence on them until October for background reports.

Advocate Neil Beardmore, representing Howland, said: “My client’s position is that he was forced to do this.”

The Crown disputes this and a proof in mitigation will be held later this year.